You're missing a lot of other quotes... but one has to wonder, if all of the sentiments in the old days were as stated in the clip -

No, obviously. Our founding fathers were of every belief, from Deist, to Christian, to Atheist. These quotes are to educate that our country wasn't founded on so-called Christian doctrine.

In fact, our fathers were trying to get AWAY from Kings and Popes because they (Kings and Popes) believed their stations were ordained by a god. They instead wanted a state governed by and for "the people".

Some people today are trying to misinform that America was founded on religious principles but that's false. Yes, some of them WERE religious. But thei...

You're missing a lot of other quotes... but one has to wonder, if all of the sentiments in the old days were as stated in the clip -

No, obviously. Our founding fathers were of every belief, from Deist, to Christian, to Atheist. These quotes are to educate that our country wasn't founded on so-called Christian doctrine.

In fact, our fathers were trying to get AWAY from Kings and Popes because they (Kings and Popes) believed their stations were ordained by a god. They instead wanted a state governed by and for "the people".

Some people today are trying to misinform that America was founded on religious principles but that's false. Yes, some of them WERE religious. But their stated desire was to keep these two institutions (religion and state) separate.

That's why I keep mentioning it. To correctly inform that their intent was to keep them separate.

"..why did they bother to put so many religious symbols into just about everything (documents, letters, money etc.)?"

Some would like to merge the two, even today. Sometimes they get away with it. But here's a far better gauge than religious symbols that crop up from time to time...to answer that question.

Why has our government never taxed religion?


When you can answer that question honestly, you'll have the truth.

If what you're saying is so - this just doesn't add up. If I'm against something, especially so adamantly - the last thing I'd want to do is to put any of the symbols or rituals of what I'm against into my daily routine or others around me or under my influence.

Religious freedom doesn't mean religious denial. The government isn't adamantly against religion as you're suggesting. It wants the two separate, first and foremost because that's what they were becoming independent of, by establishing a state by and for "the people".

THE CONSTITUTION:
...contains not one reference to a deity or to any supernatural powers. (This is not an oversight.) In fact he word "religious" arise...

If what you're saying is so - this just doesn't add up. If I'm against something, especially so adamantly - the last thing I'd want to do is to put any of the symbols or rituals of what I'm against into my daily routine or others around me or under my influence.

Religious freedom doesn't mean religious denial. The government isn't adamantly against religion as you're suggesting. It wants the two separate, first and foremost because that's what they were becoming independent of, by establishing a state by and for "the people".

THE CONSTITUTION:
...contains not one reference to a deity or to any supernatural powers. (This is not an oversight.) In fact he word "religious" arises only once:

"..but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

THE BILL OF RIGHTS:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"...

...are the first words of the First Amendment! The Founders considered a secular government plus religious freedom the most crucial of all. "Fighting Words:, Robin Morgan.


And the coins? The original motto on U.S. coins was simply "Liberty." "In God We Trust" came informally during the 19th century. And the original motto on the great seal -- devised by John Adams, Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson -- was "E Pluribus Unum" (meaning "From Many, One").

Again, why do you think religion has never been taxed by the government? Come to grips with it. Why hasn't that lucrative enterprise ever been taxed?

There's nothing that you quoted that explicitly talks about separating religion from state. There's talk about religious freedom, there's talking about not having the Congress make laws dealing with religion... which is fine, where are the words about 'separating religion and state'?

And why the prayer in Congress? Why 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance? and numerous others...

I understand that you really want to make the case about separating church and state and you certainly have every right to push for it, but the evidence from the old days just doesn't seem to match your sentiments.

Why aren't churches taxed? I see where you're trying to go with this, and even though it's a pla...

There's nothing that you quoted that explicitly talks about separating religion from state. There's talk about religious freedom, there's talking about not having the Congress make laws dealing with religion... which is fine, where are the words about 'separating religion and state'?

And why the prayer in Congress? Why 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance? and numerous others...

I understand that you really want to make the case about separating church and state and you certainly have every right to push for it, but the evidence from the old days just doesn't seem to match your sentiments.

Why aren't churches taxed? I see where you're trying to go with this, and even though it's a plausible explanation, it's not completely accurate. Churches do have influence in politics, whether they're taxed or not. And even though I don't know the precise reason the Founding Fathers considered, it could be that typically churches are organizations that don't make money, they rely on others giving them money to sustain themselves and provide services as well as assistance that they provide, so perhaps that was the reason they were exempt. The problem, IMO, with that approach is that a lot of churches are huge in terms of number of followers and they do make a ton of money, many times in not so legal fashion (Jim Bakker as one example) and to me those definitely should be taxed.

..there's talking about not having the Congress make laws dealing with religion...

Did that completely go over your head? If the job of Congress is to make laws, and it cannot make laws respecting or prohibiting religion... then what is it that you're missing?

And why the prayer in Congress? Why 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance? and numerous others...

Again, I think you're not getting historical information, but propaganda. "Under god" never appeared in the original pledge (penned in 1892 by Francis Bellamy).

"One nation, indivisible" was changed by Congress to "One nation under God, indivisible" through lobbying by the Knights of Columbus and the America...

..there's talking about not having the Congress make laws dealing with religion...

Did that completely go over your head? If the job of Congress is to make laws, and it cannot make laws respecting or prohibiting religion... then what is it that you're missing?

And why the prayer in Congress? Why 'under God' in Pledge of Allegiance? and numerous others...

Again, I think you're not getting historical information, but propaganda. "Under god" never appeared in the original pledge (penned in 1892 by Francis Bellamy).

"One nation, indivisible" was changed by Congress to "One nation under God, indivisible" through lobbying by the Knights of Columbus and the American Legion (1954) in response to McCarthyism's "godless Communism" at the height of the cold war.

"the evidence from the old days just doesn't seem to match your sentiments."

As you can clearly see, they certainly do! There is nothing I've stated that has not been supported by factual HISTORICAL data.

And your data is what...that we don't prohibit people from praying? We never did! We neither respect nor "prohibit".

All insertions to a deity came at a much later date. And these things can be verified. Why don't you do some independent research from HISTORY instead of from propaganda, and you will discover that your beliefs have been manipulated.

"...it could be that typically churches are organizations that don't make money..."

?

No. It's because they are, and always have been...separate from the state.

All I can suggest is that one day, you decide to become so honest that you refuse one word about God unless you can prove it true.

Do that, and you will find that they are ALL lies! Even this jazz about a theocratic state.

To be totally honest - I don't really care. I grew up in an atheist society and it sucked royally. I've dealt with some orthodox religious people - same. I do believe that religion, if applied correctly, can help certain people with their lives. To me there's nothing wrong with 10 Commandments, and I think it's totally insane to spend time and money to remove them from some public places, especially considering the percent of population in the US that claims, at least in polls, to be religious.

It seems to me that religion is an important part of America, otherwise people like Clinton wouldn't be toting big bibles when the camera & lights are on.

So, if it's as big a deal as it appears...

To be totally honest - I don't really care. I grew up in an atheist society and it sucked royally. I've dealt with some orthodox religious people - same. I do believe that religion, if applied correctly, can help certain people with their lives. To me there's nothing wrong with 10 Commandments, and I think it's totally insane to spend time and money to remove them from some public places, especially considering the percent of population in the US that claims, at least in polls, to be religious.

It seems to me that religion is an important part of America, otherwise people like Clinton wouldn't be toting big bibles when the camera & lights are on.

So, if it's as big a deal as it appears - I can easily see that a) it didn't start yesterday and b) it can mix with the state at certain levels. I'm certainly not a religious person in its true sense, but I have zero problems saying 'Merry Christmas' or hearing it, regardless of whether it's in a public or private venue. I've seen a lot of effort being put by the non-religious side to kill any ounce of any mention anywhere public - I think that's totally wrong. If a kid wants to thank God during a commencement speech - he/she should be able to, part of free speech, AFAIC. If someone wanted to build a church in a public school - that I would have a problem with.

In any case - to me there's ridiculousness on both sides of this issue and it seems that if everyone just applied some common sense - there's no reason why the religion couldn't coexist with the state, without undue influence.

And if all the churches do make money - I do think they should all pay taxes then. I don't have an answer here, nothing I was ever interested in investigating... ask me something about computers or Beatles or jazz rock - then you'll be in my world

But I do thank you for the education!